This is less Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” at work than a familiar lesson from elite theory: as thinkers like Mosca, Pareto, Michels and Bueno de Mesquita have argued, politics often comes down to powerful groups protecting themselves and preserving their hold on power.
The effects of this political shift go beyond the numbers in the Senate. For many Filipinos, the chamber now looks less like a place for statesmanship and more like a stage for political survival. Videos of Dela Rosa fleeing NBI agents in the Senate building spread quickly online, adding to public frustration at home and making the country’s institutions look weak abroad.
This has led to more questions about how the Senate is handling cases involving powerful political figures.
One concern is that the new Senate majority may be trying to weaken or delay any attempt to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte. This is tied to issues involving her Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth, her use of confidential funds, and other matters raised during the congressional investigation.
Another concern is the Senate’s decision to keep Dela Rosa under its protection. This has raised more questions about how far the chamber is willing to go to shield its members from outside legal action. Dela Rosa is under investigation by the ICC for his role in the anti-drug campaign under President Rodrigo Duterte, which human rights groups and international organizations say killed at least 30,000 people, most of them from poor communities.
These problems of the Senate also affect the economy. Since the pandemic, the Philippine government has been trying to attract long-term foreign investment and that effort has become even more important because the country now chairs the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. In this role, the Philippines is expected to show that its government is stable, its rules are clear and its institutions are working well.
Sudden changes in the Senate leadership, along with clashes between lawmakers and law enforcement, can make the government look unstable. Investors do not only look at economic numbers; they also pay attention to whether the political system is steady, institutions are working properly, and the law is being followed. When these things seem uncertain, investor confidence drops and money is more likely to go to countries seen as more stable.
At the heart of this issue is a bigger clash between political loyalty and the Senate’s duty to act with fairness and independence. The more the Senate uses its powers to protect certain politicians, the more it risks losing the public’s trust and harming the country’s image both at home and abroad.
This dynamic invites comparison with the Rodrigo Duterte administration’s treatment of civilian deaths during the anti-drug campaign, which it often framed as unfortunate but necessary collateral damage in the pursuit of order and security.
Today, collateral damage means something different. What is at stake now is not just the future of a few political figures, but the Senate’s credibility, the strength of our democratic institutions, and the trust that will shape the country’s political and economic future.
If political survival continues to matter more than public duty, the damage will extend far beyond the present crisis. The question now is what comes next.